74Hunter
Well-Known Member
Is it just me, or does he look like a red headed Screech?
McQueary stopped incident & called/talked to police.
- Thread starter Stiles
- Start date
Billso
Well-Known Member
See my post above. Nothing new here.
silvanthalas
Well-Known Member
McQueary witnesses a guy raping a kid.
Even if he went to police and did everything correct, he's been on campus with Sandusky for the last 9 years!?
He needs to do more than explain, he needs to have his head removed and his brain thoroughly examined.
Even if he went to police and did everything correct, he's been on campus with Sandusky for the last 9 years!?
He needs to do more than explain, he needs to have his head removed and his brain thoroughly examined.
EddyP
Well-Known Member
It's new because they actually have the statement he gave police that doesn't mention stopping it, only leaving. It also doesn't mention talking to any other police than the guy who oversees the university police. In his email he is trying to make it sound like he did more than what he said in his statment to the police and that backs up the GJ summary. Now, he probably didn't think that email would be made public(smart).
Billso
Well-Known Member
Again:
His email doesn't claim he "stopped it" - only that he made sure it stopped before he left.
His email states accurately that he talked to Schulz. The fact his purported written statement doesn't mention police contact beyond that isn't new information - the GJ summary doesn't mention it either. I'm not swayed by the breathless tone of the article.
Rather than demonizing the guy based on what (very little) info we have, I prefer to wait to hear from him.
I'll tell you what DOES sway me. A number of abuse victims (including parents of Sandusky victims) and child abuse advocates have come out very strongly criticizing Internet tough guys like you slamming McQueary's actions that day, presuming you'd know how'd you'd act in that situation, how'd you'd surely punch Sandusky right out and save the day. In fact, they say the data show NEARLY ALL witnesses react exactly how McQueary did - with total mental and physical shock and revulsion, an inability to process what they're seeing, and thus a delayed reaction to events.
But much worse is this: they are saying that the public demonization of McQueary is absolutely devastating to their efforts to encourage future witnesses to step forward.
I'm much more troubled by McQueary's seeming failure to followup in subsequent years. ESPN is now reporting he played in Sandusky's golf tourney not long after the incident. Perhaps he's a coward; or perhaps he trusted the University would do what they clearly said they would do. But based on the limited info we have - a leaked GJ summary - I'm not going to slam the guy for his actions on the day in question, reacting to the sight of a long-time coach and father figure sodomizing a boy in the showers.
Last edited:
EddyP
Well-Known Member
Never once did I say I would punch Sandusky in the face(although I did say I'd like to punch McQueary and his ol' man in the face). The only thing I have said that I know I would have done is got that kid away from him. 100% certain of that. I really could care less what "research shows". He was a grown man witnessing child abuse and didn't do the right thing. Period. McQueary is getting what he deserves.
Its amazing how many people have rushed to judgement without waiting for the facts to come out...and by saying so people jump on those types of statements as if people are actually defending any of the actions in the case.
Its just a matter of letting more information come out and letting the legal process handle this now. What if Paterno or McQueary did in fact go to the police...we do not know for certain what anyone did. If they didn't, there will be time to burn them at the stake then.
Its just a matter of letting more information come out and letting the legal process handle this now. What if Paterno or McQueary did in fact go to the police...we do not know for certain what anyone did. If they didn't, there will be time to burn them at the stake then.
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
Excellent post.
Like you and other "sane" posters, I'd like to "think" I would do something to stop it immediately. On the other hand, it might be hard to do while I'm bent over hurling like a madman at what I may have just witnessed.
The one thing I don't get about "Why didn't JoePa go to police?!" rants:
--JoePa was NOT witness to the event McQueary described. While I think JoePa should have asked if McQueary had gone to police, or even encouraged him to go to police, for JoePa to go to police and report an event to which he was not witness makes no sense.
Officer: "So, what did you see?"
JP: "Not a thing. I was told that there was horsing around"
Officer: "So you saw nothing?"
JP: "Correct"
To make a report of anything OTHER than what you witnessed first-hand makes little sense.
IF McQueary "refused" to go to police, then JoePa did all he could reporting to his superior. Beyond that, he can't go after anyone for something someone else saw. Especially when Sandusky is no longer on the PSU coaching staff.
But...IF JoePa tried to PREVENT McQueary from going to police, THAT is a problem.
I, too, will reserve judgment on McQUeary and JoePa until this plays itself out.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Right. Research shows what the typical human reaction to seeing something like that is an inability to process, shock, etc., but he's less than human because he did just that.
What makes him despicable is that he didn't follow up on it (certainly not sufficiently).
tm3308
Well-Known Member
How many doctors, teachers, and other mandatory reporters actually witnessed the crime? JoePa isn't a mandatory reporter, but the fact that he didn't witness the act doesn't mean he couldn't report it to the police.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/sports/ncaafootball/internet-posting-helped-sandusky-investigators.html?pagewanted=all%3Fsrc%3Dtp&smid=fb-share
Guys, here is a pretty comprehensive overview of the case. It mentions that at the time of the 98 incident, campus police were pushing for charges, but it was ultimately decided that they didn't have enough evidence to make a good case.
Also mentions when McQueary was first questioned as part of the current case, how relieved he was to "get it off his chest". It doesn't clarify whether he went to police, but made it seem like he didn't have much authority at the time and trusted that the higher up officials (whose official duty it was to notify police, not McQueary) would do the right thing.
I think the only reason he sent out that email and said those things is because he was mad at how he was portrayed in the media as "not doing anything" when in reality he told everyone at the university exactly what he saw and it was those people who did nothing with it. I'm guessing he later decided to not comment on it because it could potentially contradict the grand jury testimony
Guys, here is a pretty comprehensive overview of the case. It mentions that at the time of the 98 incident, campus police were pushing for charges, but it was ultimately decided that they didn't have enough evidence to make a good case.
Also mentions when McQueary was first questioned as part of the current case, how relieved he was to "get it off his chest". It doesn't clarify whether he went to police, but made it seem like he didn't have much authority at the time and trusted that the higher up officials (whose official duty it was to notify police, not McQueary) would do the right thing.
I think the only reason he sent out that email and said those things is because he was mad at how he was portrayed in the media as "not doing anything" when in reality he told everyone at the university exactly what he saw and it was those people who did nothing with it. I'm guessing he later decided to not comment on it because it could potentially contradict the grand jury testimony
silvanthalas
Well-Known Member
The demonization in this case is deserved. McQueary stayed at PSU for another NINE YEARS after witnessing this with Sandusky.
What do they need to be saying? That being part of the cover up makes you culpable. That working next to somebody you know is a monster makes you a monster. That McQueary is the LAST person who should be used as an example of a witness coming forward and doing the right thing because he was part of the cover up.
EddyP
Well-Known Member
Ahhh, another "research shows" post. Neat. I love how the folks in this camp talk about what the witness is feeling at the time who is a grown man and not about what the 10 year old boy is going through. Yeah, it must have been tough for McQueary to see that but doesn't compare to what that kid was going through. Life's tough, be a man and do the right thing. He didn't.
Billso
Well-Known Member
He reported the incident to THREE DIFFERENT OFFICIALS including the most powerful man in State College - and he's part of a cover-up?
This makes no sense. Like you, I am troubled he didn't followup again when it became evident more had not been done, after being assured it was being investigated - but the coverup falls on Schulz, the AD, the president, and possibly Paterno.
Also, he did not "work next to" Sandusky, who by 2002 was long gone from the PSU staff.
To me, it is telling that the police and investigators view McQueary as a good guy, and the key break in their investigation.
Last edited:
EddyP
Well-Known Member
So what's the deal Billy you related to this guy or have Irish blood in ya? Not gonna argue with you on what he should have done when he saw it, you give him a pass and I'm not. Agree/disagree. But, just because you've notified the higher ups doesn't give him a pass on the cover up. He remained silent and was "relieved" when police contacted him after the anonymous internet post(a year ago). Hell the public still might not know about the 2002 incident if not for that internet post. So while he might not be the MOST involved in covering it up he is at least a silent parnter in it. Sure the police like him because he is a PSU insider and the only one telling the truth at this point.
silvanthalas
Well-Known Member
When nothing was done, he did not go further. Yes, he's part of the cover up.
Sandusky was on campus. He was in the football facilities. McQueary went to charity events that were hosted by Sandusky and The Second Mile, one of them as few as 4 weeks after McQueary caught Sandusky raping one of his victims.
If you don't think McQueary saw plenty of Sandusky over the last 9 years, you're off your rocker.
Billso
Well-Known Member
So now "saw plenty of" equals "worked next to". Got it.
Pesky details. Details are for losers. Just a matter of time before people say McQueary's actions were just as bad as Sandusky's. Actually, it's already happened in the PA papers.
